Tag Archives: World Wildlife Fund

World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the global conservation organization, seeks a talented colleague to help lead The Natural Capital Project’s efforts to develop innovative policy and finance approaches for mainstreaming ecosystem services. The Natural Capital Project (NatCap) – a partnership of World Wildlife Fund, Stanford University and The Nature Conservancy – develops tools to quantify ecosystem services and incorporate their value into decisions, and demonstrates these approaches in important, contrasting places around the world. (www.naturalcapitalproject.org ).

The successful candidate will: provide policy and finance technical expertise to NatCap partner sites; lead projects with major external policy institutions who are interested in deploying NatCap’s tools and approaches more widely; lead the development of policy tools that enable the effective integration of ecosystem services into decisions; help to refine and further develop NatCap’s policy and finance strategy; enable lesson sharing among users of NatCap’s tools and approaches, and help with other tasks as required, particularly in the areas of fund-raising, communications, partner coordination and publications. This position has an initial duration of two years, with the possibility of extension based on funding.

Basic requirements include: a Master’s degree or equivalent experience in public policy, international development, environmental/ecological economics, environmental management, law, business or related field. A minimum of two years additional experience working on relevant policy or finance issues in the public or private sector, preferably with significant international experience. Experience with fundraising, project development and working with multiple partners. Excellent operational, communication and organizational skills. Must be able to work independently and as part of a decentralized, diverse team. Applicants must be available to travel. Please submit a cover letter and resume by April 9, 2010.

Pedreres de s’Hostal is a disused stone quarry on the island of Minorca, Spain. In 1994, the quarry saw its last stonecutters, and since then, the non-profit organization Líthica has been hard at work transforming this industrial landscape into a post-industrial heritage park.

Based on climate models and a survey of suitable habitats, scientists introduced 500 to 600 individuals of twobutterfly species to new sites in England, miles away from what were, in 1999 and 2000, the northern limits of their natural ranges. After monitoring for six years, they found that both introduced populations grew and expanded their turf from the point of release, similarly to newly colonized natural areas.

The butterflies’ success outside of their usual limits suggests that their naturally shifting distributions had been lagging behind the pace of climate warming, the researchers conclude. The results also bode well for the careful use of this sometimes controversial technique for other species threatened by climate change. After all, wildlife can only run so fast and for those species moving up mountains to escape the heat, there’s only so far they can go.

MacArthur Foundation granting $2 million to help ecosystems and human communities adapt to the effects of climate change. On Gristmill:

the IUCN and the World Wildlife Fund — will use it to establish a new Ecosystems and Livelihoods Adaptation Network. Details on the network are still being hashed out, but it’s intended to be a resource for promoting best practices to conservation groups, governments, and others. It will aid projects such as creating protected corridors to help mountain-dwelling animals migrate to higher elevations and restoring natural barriers on coastlines, such as mangrove forests.

If we start to see faster-than-expected increases in temperature, deadly heat waves and storms, crop failures and drought, the pressure to do something will be enormous. Desperation is a powerful driver. Desperation plus a (relatively) low-cost response, coupled with quick (if not necessarily dependable) benefits, can become an unstoppable force.

If we don’t want to see geoengineering deployed, we have to get our carbon emissions down as rapidly and as widely as possible. If we don’t — if our best efforts aren’t enough against decades of carbon growth and temperature inertia — we will see efforts to do something, anything, to avoid global catastrophe.

Many of us oppose geoengineering megaprojects, not because we are afraid of science or technology (indeed, most bright green environmentalists believe you can’t win this fight without much more science and technology), but because these kinds of megaprojects are bad planetary management.

It’s bad planetary management to take big chances with a high probability of “epic fail” outcomes (like emptying the sea of life through ocean acidification). It’s bad planetary management to build large, singular and brittle projects when small, multiple and resilient answers exist and will suffice if employed. It’s bad planetary management to assume that this time — unlike essentially every other large-scale intervention in natural systems in recorded history — we’ll get it right and pull it off without unintended consequences.

Jamais and Alex debate their points a bit in the WorldChanging comments.